Anonymous
04/12/2023 15:27
Subject: Is Atheism a religion without a church or temple ?
Anonymous wrote:ANOTHER ANTI-THEIST TROLL THREAD.
GUMBALL POSTER, EMOJI POSTER, and a NEW EUGENICS EMBRACER POSTER REPORTING FOR DOODY!
So much hate. Do you pray with the same hands that wrote that vitriol?
Anonymous
04/12/2023 15:22
Subject: Is Atheism a religion without a church or temple ?
Only an angry and socially isolated person calls people who have children, breeders.
Anonymous
04/12/2023 15:09
Subject: Is Atheism a religion without a church or temple ?
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Gosh, I haven’t seen any of those here. You can not believe in religion and even dislike religion, but certainly still be an American who values the Constitution and the right to worship as you wish.
Or not.[/quote]
I sure have seen anti-theistic posts here. And I’ve seen people who disparage religious people as bigots be just as bigoted about religion, without one ounce of self-awareness.
[/quote]
People telling you to stop shoving your religion in their face and up their vagina absolutely do support the Constitution. In fact, we just want our personal liberty back. [/quote]
Freedom of religion- nobody is shoving their religion “in your face.” How would a religious person be shoving their religion in your face?
No one is shoving their religion in anyone’s vagina. That’s a hysterical, crude, and disgusting statement, completely without merit. It’s inflammatory and ridiculous rhetoric that people use to justify killing innocent babies, while painting themselves as victims.
The victims are the babies whose lives and bodies are destroyed for the sake of convenience.[/quote]
You are absolutely shoving your religion in my face and up my vagina. If you want to believe that a clump of cells is a “baby” and women have no personal liberty, then you believe that in your house with consenting adults. You can’t force your extremist religious beliefs on others.
[/quote]
Like toddler or adolescent, the terms embryo and fetus do not refer to nonhumans, but to humans at particular stages of development.
Once we grant that the unborn are human beings, it should settle the question of their right to live.
The right to live doesn’t increase with age and size; otherwise toddlers and adolescents have less right to live than adults.
The comparison between a baby’s rights and a mother’s rights is unequal. What is at stake in abortion is the mother’s lifestyle, as opposed to the baby’s life.
It is reasonable for society to expect an adult to live temporarily with an inconvenience if the only alternative is killing a child.[/quote]
You are welcome to have your religious beliefs around personhood. But you don’t get to define it and force it on everyone else.
Humans are not a “person” until they are born alive. An embryo/fetus is not equal to a living, breathing woman.
Keep your religion to yourself and stay out of my vagina. Thanks.
[/quote]
A child’s “breathing,” her intake of oxygen, begins long before birth.
Someone’s helplessness or dependency should motivate us to protect her, not to destroy her.
The point of viability changes because it depends on technology, not the unborn herself. Eventually babies may be viable from the point of conception.
In a broad sense, many born people are not viable because they are incapable of surviving without depending on others.[/quote]
An embryo/fetus absorbing oxygen via the umbilical cord is not equal to a living, breathing woman.
Woman are people who have autonomy over their body. Your religion says otherwise.
Keep your religion out of my body. You are infringing on my rights.
[/quote]
+1. Keep your religion out of my body, and I’ll keep my religion out of yours. I’m disgusted at the rampant and thoughtless breeding of people in the pro life movement, as well as medical torture. It’s destroying the planet and wasting scarce resources, as well as dumbing down the gene pool. In my world, you’d be fixed and cut off from life support. You good with that?[/quote]
What religion “fixes” people and “cuts them off from life support?”
[/quote]
The religion of acknowledging reality. God’s not healing the 23 weekers and the brain dead, but it doesn’t seem to stop the “pro lifers” from subjecting them to endless torture while they wait for God to change his mind. Overpopulation is destroying the planet. The type of people who have 10 kids aren’t the type of people who should have having 10 kids if we want to advance as a civilization.
I’m not alone in these beliefs. I’d be content to let people make different choices, even though I view them as barbaric and morally wrong, but since religious folks are in the business of forcing their beliefs on others I thought I’d raise this little thought exercise about what it might be like if someone forced their beliefs on them. Of course, I’m not even sure these people could even acknowledge that other people might think differently than them they are so certain of their correctness and superiority so I’m probably wasting my breath. [/quote]
So, you believe in eugenics.
You have the same philosophy with THE THIRD REICH.
You want to decide who can have children.[/quote]
I’d prefer people mind their own business and keep their silly fairy tales about the afterworld the out of my uterus, and I’ll keep my scientifically-informed beliefs about how overbreeders are wrecking the planet out of yours. And I see you have nothing to excuse your torture of helpless, hopeless neonates and the brain dead. I thought they felt pain? Not enough to stop you from subjecting them to it until their corpses rot under their ventilated lungs I guess.
But you raise a good point- you know who else banned abortion and promoted motherhood uber alles? The THIRD REICH, that’s who. Thanks for the reminder and the good reference! The Nazis sure did love their white babies and were happy to forcibly resettle them if the birth mother wasn’t married. Sounds like another group of people in modern America I know.
Or not.[/quote]
I sure have seen anti-theistic posts here. And I’ve seen people who disparage religious people as bigots be just as bigoted about religion, without one ounce of self-awareness.
[/quote]
People telling you to stop shoving your religion in their face and up their vagina absolutely do support the Constitution. In fact, we just want our personal liberty back. [/quote]
Freedom of religion- nobody is shoving their religion “in your face.” How would a religious person be shoving their religion in your face?
No one is shoving their religion in anyone’s vagina. That’s a hysterical, crude, and disgusting statement, completely without merit. It’s inflammatory and ridiculous rhetoric that people use to justify killing innocent babies, while painting themselves as victims.
The victims are the babies whose lives and bodies are destroyed for the sake of convenience.[/quote]
You are absolutely shoving your religion in my face and up my vagina. If you want to believe that a clump of cells is a “baby” and women have no personal liberty, then you believe that in your house with consenting adults. You can’t force your extremist religious beliefs on others.
[/quote]
Like toddler or adolescent, the terms embryo and fetus do not refer to nonhumans, but to humans at particular stages of development.
Once we grant that the unborn are human beings, it should settle the question of their right to live.
The right to live doesn’t increase with age and size; otherwise toddlers and adolescents have less right to live than adults.
The comparison between a baby’s rights and a mother’s rights is unequal. What is at stake in abortion is the mother’s lifestyle, as opposed to the baby’s life.
It is reasonable for society to expect an adult to live temporarily with an inconvenience if the only alternative is killing a child.[/quote]
You are welcome to have your religious beliefs around personhood. But you don’t get to define it and force it on everyone else.
Humans are not a “person” until they are born alive. An embryo/fetus is not equal to a living, breathing woman.
Keep your religion to yourself and stay out of my vagina. Thanks.
[/quote]
A child’s “breathing,” her intake of oxygen, begins long before birth.
Someone’s helplessness or dependency should motivate us to protect her, not to destroy her.
The point of viability changes because it depends on technology, not the unborn herself. Eventually babies may be viable from the point of conception.
In a broad sense, many born people are not viable because they are incapable of surviving without depending on others.[/quote]
An embryo/fetus absorbing oxygen via the umbilical cord is not equal to a living, breathing woman.
Woman are people who have autonomy over their body. Your religion says otherwise.
Keep your religion out of my body. You are infringing on my rights.
[/quote]
+1. Keep your religion out of my body, and I’ll keep my religion out of yours. I’m disgusted at the rampant and thoughtless breeding of people in the pro life movement, as well as medical torture. It’s destroying the planet and wasting scarce resources, as well as dumbing down the gene pool. In my world, you’d be fixed and cut off from life support. You good with that?[/quote]
What religion “fixes” people and “cuts them off from life support?”
[/quote]
The religion of acknowledging reality. God’s not healing the 23 weekers and the brain dead, but it doesn’t seem to stop the “pro lifers” from subjecting them to endless torture while they wait for God to change his mind. Overpopulation is destroying the planet. The type of people who have 10 kids aren’t the type of people who should have having 10 kids if we want to advance as a civilization.
I’m not alone in these beliefs. I’d be content to let people make different choices, even though I view them as barbaric and morally wrong, but since religious folks are in the business of forcing their beliefs on others I thought I’d raise this little thought exercise about what it might be like if someone forced their beliefs on them. Of course, I’m not even sure these people could even acknowledge that other people might think differently than them they are so certain of their correctness and superiority so I’m probably wasting my breath. [/quote]
So, you believe in eugenics.
You have the same philosophy with THE THIRD REICH.
You want to decide who can have children.[/quote]
I’d prefer people mind their own business and keep their silly fairy tales about the afterworld the out of my uterus, and I’ll keep my scientifically-informed beliefs about how overbreeders are wrecking the planet out of yours. And I see you have nothing to excuse your torture of helpless, hopeless neonates and the brain dead. I thought they felt pain? Not enough to stop you from subjecting them to it until their corpses rot under their ventilated lungs I guess.
But you raise a good point- you know who else banned abortion and promoted motherhood uber alles? The THIRD REICH, that’s who. Thanks for the reminder and the good reference! The Nazis sure did love their white babies and were happy to forcibly resettle them if the birth mother wasn’t married. Sounds like another group of people in modern America I know.
Anonymous
04/12/2023 13:22
Subject: Is Atheism a religion without a church or temple ?
Anonymous wrote:ANOTHER ANTI-THEIST TROLL THREAD.
GUMBALL POSTER, EMOJI POSTER, and a NEW EUGENICS EMBRACER POSTER REPORTING FOR DOODY!
Well, now at least we know the threadhsitter is the usual theist.
Anonymous
04/12/2023 11:54
Subject: Is Atheism a religion without a church or temple ?
ANOTHER ANTI-THEIST TROLL THREAD.
GUMBALL POSTER, EMOJI POSTER, and a NEW EUGENICS EMBRACER POSTER REPORTING FOR DOODY!
GUMBALL POSTER, EMOJI POSTER, and a NEW EUGENICS EMBRACER POSTER REPORTING FOR DOODY!
Anonymous
04/12/2023 11:24
Subject: Is Atheism a religion without a church or temple ?
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Gosh, I haven’t seen any of those here. You can not believe in religion and even dislike religion, but certainly still be an American who values the Constitution and the right to worship as you wish.
Or not.[/quote]
I sure have seen anti-theistic posts here. And I’ve seen people who disparage religious people as bigots be just as bigoted about religion, without one ounce of self-awareness.
[/quote]
People telling you to stop shoving your religion in their face and up their vagina absolutely do support the Constitution. In fact, we just want our personal liberty back. [/quote]
Freedom of religion- nobody is shoving their religion “in your face.” How would a religious person be shoving their religion in your face?
No one is shoving their religion in anyone’s vagina. That’s a hysterical, crude, and disgusting statement, completely without merit. It’s inflammatory and ridiculous rhetoric that people use to justify killing innocent babies, while painting themselves as victims.
The victims are the babies whose lives and bodies are destroyed for the sake of convenience.[/quote]
You are absolutely shoving your religion in my face and up my vagina. If you want to believe that a clump of cells is a “baby” and women have no personal liberty, then you believe that in your house with consenting adults. You can’t force your extremist religious beliefs on others.
[/quote]
Like toddler or adolescent, the terms embryo and fetus do not refer to nonhumans, but to humans at particular stages of development.
Once we grant that the unborn are human beings, it should settle the question of their right to live.
The right to live doesn’t increase with age and size; otherwise toddlers and adolescents have less right to live than adults.
The comparison between a baby’s rights and a mother’s rights is unequal. What is at stake in abortion is the mother’s lifestyle, as opposed to the baby’s life.
It is reasonable for society to expect an adult to live temporarily with an inconvenience if the only alternative is killing a child.[/quote]
You are welcome to have your religious beliefs around personhood. But you don’t get to define it and force it on everyone else.
Humans are not a “person” until they are born alive. An embryo/fetus is not equal to a living, breathing woman.
Keep your religion to yourself and stay out of my vagina. Thanks.
[/quote]
A child’s “breathing,” her intake of oxygen, begins long before birth.
Someone’s helplessness or dependency should motivate us to protect her, not to destroy her.
The point of viability changes because it depends on technology, not the unborn herself. Eventually babies may be viable from the point of conception.
In a broad sense, many born people are not viable because they are incapable of surviving without depending on others.[/quote]
An embryo/fetus absorbing oxygen via the umbilical cord is not equal to a living, breathing woman.
Woman are people who have autonomy over their body. Your religion says otherwise.
Keep your religion out of my body. You are infringing on my rights.
[/quote]
+1. Keep your religion out of my body, and I’ll keep my religion out of yours. I’m disgusted at the rampant and thoughtless breeding of people in the pro life movement, as well as medical torture. It’s destroying the planet and wasting scarce resources, as well as dumbing down the gene pool. In my world, you’d be fixed and cut off from life support. You good with that?[/quote]
What religion “fixes” people and “cuts them off from life support?”
[/quote]
The religion of acknowledging reality. God’s not healing the 23 weekers and the brain dead, but it doesn’t seem to stop the “pro lifers” from subjecting them to endless torture while they wait for God to change his mind. Overpopulation is destroying the planet. The type of people who have 10 kids aren’t the type of people who should have having 10 kids if we want to advance as a civilization.
I’m not alone in these beliefs. I’d be content to let people make different choices, even though I view them as barbaric and morally wrong, but since religious folks are in the business of forcing their beliefs on others I thought I’d raise this little thought exercise about what it might be like if someone forced their beliefs on them. Of course, I’m not even sure these people could even acknowledge that other people might think differently than them they are so certain of their correctness and superiority so I’m probably wasting my breath. [/quote]
So, you believe in eugenics.
You have the same philosophy with THE THIRD REICH.
You want to decide who can have children.
Or not.[/quote]
I sure have seen anti-theistic posts here. And I’ve seen people who disparage religious people as bigots be just as bigoted about religion, without one ounce of self-awareness.
[/quote]
People telling you to stop shoving your religion in their face and up their vagina absolutely do support the Constitution. In fact, we just want our personal liberty back. [/quote]
Freedom of religion- nobody is shoving their religion “in your face.” How would a religious person be shoving their religion in your face?
No one is shoving their religion in anyone’s vagina. That’s a hysterical, crude, and disgusting statement, completely without merit. It’s inflammatory and ridiculous rhetoric that people use to justify killing innocent babies, while painting themselves as victims.
The victims are the babies whose lives and bodies are destroyed for the sake of convenience.[/quote]
You are absolutely shoving your religion in my face and up my vagina. If you want to believe that a clump of cells is a “baby” and women have no personal liberty, then you believe that in your house with consenting adults. You can’t force your extremist religious beliefs on others.
[/quote]
Like toddler or adolescent, the terms embryo and fetus do not refer to nonhumans, but to humans at particular stages of development.
Once we grant that the unborn are human beings, it should settle the question of their right to live.
The right to live doesn’t increase with age and size; otherwise toddlers and adolescents have less right to live than adults.
The comparison between a baby’s rights and a mother’s rights is unequal. What is at stake in abortion is the mother’s lifestyle, as opposed to the baby’s life.
It is reasonable for society to expect an adult to live temporarily with an inconvenience if the only alternative is killing a child.[/quote]
You are welcome to have your religious beliefs around personhood. But you don’t get to define it and force it on everyone else.
Humans are not a “person” until they are born alive. An embryo/fetus is not equal to a living, breathing woman.
Keep your religion to yourself and stay out of my vagina. Thanks.
[/quote]
A child’s “breathing,” her intake of oxygen, begins long before birth.
Someone’s helplessness or dependency should motivate us to protect her, not to destroy her.
The point of viability changes because it depends on technology, not the unborn herself. Eventually babies may be viable from the point of conception.
In a broad sense, many born people are not viable because they are incapable of surviving without depending on others.[/quote]
An embryo/fetus absorbing oxygen via the umbilical cord is not equal to a living, breathing woman.
Woman are people who have autonomy over their body. Your religion says otherwise.
Keep your religion out of my body. You are infringing on my rights.
[/quote]
+1. Keep your religion out of my body, and I’ll keep my religion out of yours. I’m disgusted at the rampant and thoughtless breeding of people in the pro life movement, as well as medical torture. It’s destroying the planet and wasting scarce resources, as well as dumbing down the gene pool. In my world, you’d be fixed and cut off from life support. You good with that?[/quote]
What religion “fixes” people and “cuts them off from life support?”
[/quote]
The religion of acknowledging reality. God’s not healing the 23 weekers and the brain dead, but it doesn’t seem to stop the “pro lifers” from subjecting them to endless torture while they wait for God to change his mind. Overpopulation is destroying the planet. The type of people who have 10 kids aren’t the type of people who should have having 10 kids if we want to advance as a civilization.
I’m not alone in these beliefs. I’d be content to let people make different choices, even though I view them as barbaric and morally wrong, but since religious folks are in the business of forcing their beliefs on others I thought I’d raise this little thought exercise about what it might be like if someone forced their beliefs on them. Of course, I’m not even sure these people could even acknowledge that other people might think differently than them they are so certain of their correctness and superiority so I’m probably wasting my breath. [/quote]
So, you believe in eugenics.
You have the same philosophy with THE THIRD REICH.
You want to decide who can have children.
Anonymous
04/12/2023 10:53
Subject: Is Atheism a religion without a church or temple ?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The religion of acknowledging reality?
So your religion “fixes” people? What does that mean?
your religion cuts people off from life support.
Where are your religious texts, teachings, etc? Where is your church?
It’s my sincerely held beliefs. Humanist? I don’t know. Would you like me to register a church with the IRS whereby our central tenet is we treat people at least as good as we treat pet dogs so you can recognize it? What is a church if not just a collection of people who believe certain things? The fact that multiple people bought into a delusion for thousands of years doesn’t prove the belief is valid.
Oooooo - let’s do it to get the bogus tax exemptions that “religions” get.
Anonymous
04/12/2023 10:30
Subject: Is Atheism a religion without a church or temple ?
Anonymous wrote:The religion of acknowledging reality?
So your religion “fixes” people? What does that mean?
your religion cuts people off from life support.
Where are your religious texts, teachings, etc? Where is your church?
It’s my sincerely held beliefs. Humanist? I don’t know. Would you like me to register a church with the IRS whereby our central tenet is we treat people at least as good as we treat pet dogs so you can recognize it? What is a church if not just a collection of people who believe certain things? The fact that multiple people bought into a delusion for thousands of years doesn’t prove the belief is valid.
Anonymous
04/12/2023 10:06
Subject: Is Atheism a religion without a church or temple ?
The religion of acknowledging reality?
So your religion “fixes” people? What does that mean?
your religion cuts people off from life support.
Where are your religious texts, teachings, etc? Where is your church?
So your religion “fixes” people? What does that mean?
your religion cuts people off from life support.
Where are your religious texts, teachings, etc? Where is your church?
Anonymous
04/12/2023 09:59
Subject: Is Atheism a religion without a church or temple ?
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Gosh, I haven’t seen any of those here. You can not believe in religion and even dislike religion, but certainly still be an American who values the Constitution and the right to worship as you wish.
Or not.[/quote]
I sure have seen anti-theistic posts here. And I’ve seen people who disparage religious people as bigots be just as bigoted about religion, without one ounce of self-awareness.
[/quote]
People telling you to stop shoving your religion in their face and up their vagina absolutely do support the Constitution. In fact, we just want our personal liberty back. [/quote]
Freedom of religion- nobody is shoving their religion “in your face.” How would a religious person be shoving their religion in your face?
No one is shoving their religion in anyone’s vagina. That’s a hysterical, crude, and disgusting statement, completely without merit. It’s inflammatory and ridiculous rhetoric that people use to justify killing innocent babies, while painting themselves as victims.
The victims are the babies whose lives and bodies are destroyed for the sake of convenience.[/quote]
You are absolutely shoving your religion in my face and up my vagina. If you want to believe that a clump of cells is a “baby” and women have no personal liberty, then you believe that in your house with consenting adults. You can’t force your extremist religious beliefs on others.
[/quote]
Like toddler or adolescent, the terms embryo and fetus do not refer to nonhumans, but to humans at particular stages of development.
Once we grant that the unborn are human beings, it should settle the question of their right to live.
The right to live doesn’t increase with age and size; otherwise toddlers and adolescents have less right to live than adults.
The comparison between a baby’s rights and a mother’s rights is unequal. What is at stake in abortion is the mother’s lifestyle, as opposed to the baby’s life.
It is reasonable for society to expect an adult to live temporarily with an inconvenience if the only alternative is killing a child.[/quote]
You are welcome to have your religious beliefs around personhood. But you don’t get to define it and force it on everyone else.
Humans are not a “person” until they are born alive. An embryo/fetus is not equal to a living, breathing woman.
Keep your religion to yourself and stay out of my vagina. Thanks.
[/quote]
A child’s “breathing,” her intake of oxygen, begins long before birth.
Someone’s helplessness or dependency should motivate us to protect her, not to destroy her.
The point of viability changes because it depends on technology, not the unborn herself. Eventually babies may be viable from the point of conception.
In a broad sense, many born people are not viable because they are incapable of surviving without depending on others.[/quote]
An embryo/fetus absorbing oxygen via the umbilical cord is not equal to a living, breathing woman.
Woman are people who have autonomy over their body. Your religion says otherwise.
Keep your religion out of my body. You are infringing on my rights.
[/quote]
+1. Keep your religion out of my body, and I’ll keep my religion out of yours. I’m disgusted at the rampant and thoughtless breeding of people in the pro life movement, as well as medical torture. It’s destroying the planet and wasting scarce resources, as well as dumbing down the gene pool. In my world, you’d be fixed and cut off from life support. You good with that?[/quote]
What religion “fixes” people and “cuts them off from life support?”
[/quote]
The religion of acknowledging reality. God’s not healing the 23 weekers and the brain dead, but it doesn’t seem to stop the “pro lifers” from subjecting them to endless torture while they wait for God to change his mind. Overpopulation is destroying the planet. The type of people who have 10 kids aren’t the type of people who should have having 10 kids if we want to advance as a civilization.
I’m not alone in these beliefs. I’d be content to let people make different choices, even though I view them as barbaric and morally wrong, but since religious folks are in the business of forcing their beliefs on others I thought I’d raise this little thought exercise about what it might be like if someone forced their beliefs on them. Of course, I’m not even sure these people could even acknowledge that other people might think differently than them they are so certain of their correctness and superiority so I’m probably wasting my breath.
Or not.[/quote]
I sure have seen anti-theistic posts here. And I’ve seen people who disparage religious people as bigots be just as bigoted about religion, without one ounce of self-awareness.
[/quote]
People telling you to stop shoving your religion in their face and up their vagina absolutely do support the Constitution. In fact, we just want our personal liberty back. [/quote]
Freedom of religion- nobody is shoving their religion “in your face.” How would a religious person be shoving their religion in your face?
No one is shoving their religion in anyone’s vagina. That’s a hysterical, crude, and disgusting statement, completely without merit. It’s inflammatory and ridiculous rhetoric that people use to justify killing innocent babies, while painting themselves as victims.
The victims are the babies whose lives and bodies are destroyed for the sake of convenience.[/quote]
You are absolutely shoving your religion in my face and up my vagina. If you want to believe that a clump of cells is a “baby” and women have no personal liberty, then you believe that in your house with consenting adults. You can’t force your extremist religious beliefs on others.
[/quote]
Like toddler or adolescent, the terms embryo and fetus do not refer to nonhumans, but to humans at particular stages of development.
Once we grant that the unborn are human beings, it should settle the question of their right to live.
The right to live doesn’t increase with age and size; otherwise toddlers and adolescents have less right to live than adults.
The comparison between a baby’s rights and a mother’s rights is unequal. What is at stake in abortion is the mother’s lifestyle, as opposed to the baby’s life.
It is reasonable for society to expect an adult to live temporarily with an inconvenience if the only alternative is killing a child.[/quote]
You are welcome to have your religious beliefs around personhood. But you don’t get to define it and force it on everyone else.
Humans are not a “person” until they are born alive. An embryo/fetus is not equal to a living, breathing woman.
Keep your religion to yourself and stay out of my vagina. Thanks.
[/quote]
A child’s “breathing,” her intake of oxygen, begins long before birth.
Someone’s helplessness or dependency should motivate us to protect her, not to destroy her.
The point of viability changes because it depends on technology, not the unborn herself. Eventually babies may be viable from the point of conception.
In a broad sense, many born people are not viable because they are incapable of surviving without depending on others.[/quote]
An embryo/fetus absorbing oxygen via the umbilical cord is not equal to a living, breathing woman.
Woman are people who have autonomy over their body. Your religion says otherwise.
Keep your religion out of my body. You are infringing on my rights.
[/quote]
+1. Keep your religion out of my body, and I’ll keep my religion out of yours. I’m disgusted at the rampant and thoughtless breeding of people in the pro life movement, as well as medical torture. It’s destroying the planet and wasting scarce resources, as well as dumbing down the gene pool. In my world, you’d be fixed and cut off from life support. You good with that?[/quote]
What religion “fixes” people and “cuts them off from life support?”
[/quote]
The religion of acknowledging reality. God’s not healing the 23 weekers and the brain dead, but it doesn’t seem to stop the “pro lifers” from subjecting them to endless torture while they wait for God to change his mind. Overpopulation is destroying the planet. The type of people who have 10 kids aren’t the type of people who should have having 10 kids if we want to advance as a civilization.
I’m not alone in these beliefs. I’d be content to let people make different choices, even though I view them as barbaric and morally wrong, but since religious folks are in the business of forcing their beliefs on others I thought I’d raise this little thought exercise about what it might be like if someone forced their beliefs on them. Of course, I’m not even sure these people could even acknowledge that other people might think differently than them they are so certain of their correctness and superiority so I’m probably wasting my breath.
Anonymous
04/12/2023 09:03
Subject: Is Atheism a religion without a church or temple ?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:ATHEISTS OUT IN FORCE, ALL STRAWMEN WILL BE FIXED AND CUT OFF FROM LIFE SUPPORT.
Wow that's A+ engagement, which really makes you look great. I am sure you are very proud of yourself.
Apparently, a religious person feels someone should be “fixed” and cut off of life support, and it’s ok. Would you agree? They won’t explain what religion they believe that promotes that thinking.
Christianity doesn’t teach that.
Anonymous
04/12/2023 09:00
Subject: Is Atheism a religion without a church or temple ?
Anonymous wrote:ATHEISTS OUT IN FORCE, ALL STRAWMEN WILL BE FIXED AND CUT OFF FROM LIFE SUPPORT.
Wow that's A+ engagement, which really makes you look great. I am sure you are very proud of yourself.
Anonymous
04/12/2023 08:55
Subject: Is Atheism a religion without a church or temple ?
ATHEISTS OUT IN FORCE, ALL STRAWMEN WILL BE FIXED AND CUT OFF FROM LIFE SUPPORT.
Anonymous
04/12/2023 08:38
Subject: Is Atheism a religion without a church or temple ?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Gosh, I haven’t seen any of those here. You can not believe in religion and even dislike religion, but certainly still be an American who values the Constitution and the right to worship as you wish.
Or not.
I sure have seen anti-theistic posts here. And I’ve seen people who disparage religious people as bigots be just as bigoted about religion, without one ounce of self-awareness.
+1000
Are you accusing people of being bigoted against bigots as if that’s something they should be ashamed of?
Being bigoted against religion is not being bigoted against bigots.
Look^^ perfect example in action ‼️
That’s not the question I asked. Can you please answer that question or don’t engage at all.
So all religions and all religious people are bigoted?
Still no answer to the question. Have a proper conversation or don't engage.
NP. S/he answered, you're just too dim to see it. You implied--even if you don't understand that you did--that all religious people are bigoted.
No, I DID NOT IMPLY THAT. That is a STRAWMAN and a LIE. The fact that you used the word "imply" indicates your attempt to strawman.
Next time you wonder what someone thinks, instead of guessing to support your narrative, ASK THEM. That's what I did, and I DID NOT get an answer to that question.
And yes, caps appear necessary in this case.
Anonymous
04/12/2023 07:17
Subject: Is Atheism a religion without a church or temple ?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Gosh, I haven’t seen any of those here. You can not believe in religion and even dislike religion, but certainly still be an American who values the Constitution and the right to worship as you wish.
Or not.
I sure have seen anti-theistic posts here. And I’ve seen people who disparage religious people as bigots be just as bigoted about religion, without one ounce of self-awareness.
People telling you to stop shoving your religion in their face and up their vagina absolutely do support the Constitution. In fact, we just want our personal liberty back.
Freedom of religion- nobody is shoving their religion “in your face.” How would a religious person be shoving their religion in your face?
No one is shoving their religion in anyone’s vagina. That’s a hysterical, crude, and disgusting statement, completely without merit. It’s inflammatory and ridiculous rhetoric that people use to justify killing innocent babies, while painting themselves as victims.
The victims are the babies whose lives and bodies are destroyed for the sake of convenience.
You are absolutely shoving your religion in my face and up my vagina. If you want to believe that a clump of cells is a “baby” and women have no personal liberty, then you believe that in your house with consenting adults. You can’t force your extremist religious beliefs on others.
Like toddler or adolescent, the terms embryo and fetus do not refer to nonhumans, but to humans at particular stages of development.
Once we grant that the unborn are human beings, it should settle the question of their right to live.
The right to live doesn’t increase with age and size; otherwise toddlers and adolescents have less right to live than adults.
The comparison between a baby’s rights and a mother’s rights is unequal. What is at stake in abortion is the mother’s lifestyle, as opposed to the baby’s life.
It is reasonable for society to expect an adult to live temporarily with an inconvenience if the only alternative is killing a child.
You are welcome to have your religious beliefs around personhood. But you don’t get to define it and force it on everyone else.
Humans are not a “person” until they are born alive. An embryo/fetus is not equal to a living, breathing woman.
Keep your religion to yourself and stay out of my vagina. Thanks.
A child’s “breathing,” her intake of oxygen, begins long before birth.
Someone’s helplessness or dependency should motivate us to protect her, not to destroy her.
The point of viability changes because it depends on technology, not the unborn herself. Eventually babies may be viable from the point of conception.
In a broad sense, many born people are not viable because they are incapable of surviving without depending on others.
An embryo/fetus absorbing oxygen via the umbilical cord is not equal to a living, breathing woman.
Woman are people who have autonomy over their body. Your religion says otherwise.
Keep your religion out of my body. You are infringing on my rights.
+1. Keep your religion out of my body, and I’ll keep my religion out of yours. I’m disgusted at the rampant and thoughtless breeding of people in the pro life movement, as well as medical torture. It’s destroying the planet and wasting scarce resources, as well as dumbing down the gene pool. In my world, you’d be fixed and cut off from life support. You good with that?
What religion “fixes” people and “cuts them off from life support?”